Nobody thought it could last this long. Following the first round of “tea parties” last tax season the haphazard grassroots movement calling for “fiscal responsibility constitutionally limited government and free markets” (as well as comparing Obama and the left to Mao Lenin Hitler fascists socialists communists and every conflicting political figure and ideology in between) at first seemed to be losing steam. Though it had reminded the nation that the far right is certainly alive and kicking (or rather it made it appear screaming threats and obscenities) it seemed to be such a far-fetched polarizing and reactionary movement within the greater Republican camp that few believed it would survive the summer months.
Yet the movement has marched steadily on however disjointedly enough so even to warrant a counter-movement: the recently formed Coffee Party. Despite the jerk reaction that a movement built on such a slippery foundation— and at many times on radical offensive remarks— could not persist the Tea Party is as much in the media today as it was last spring. A convention was held recently and the movement has claimed significant sway over elections already such as the fiasco that was the Massachusetts race for Ted Kennedy’s vacated Senate seat. And earlier this year following the forced resignation of Florida’s GOP chairman Tea Party spokesperson Dale Roberston didn’t mince words as he threatened Texas politicians that the movement would be “turning [its] guns on anyone who doesn’t support constitutional conservative candidates. If they don’t get that…they are going to be ostracized.”
These accusations and threats are only glimpses of the Tea Party’s divisive reactionary stance and tactics. Because the reality is despite perhaps the purest of intentions of some within the movement much of the Tea Party’s rhetoric is little more than fear-mongering. Outrageous claims linking Obama and the left to every supposedly dangerous political ideology and despotic regime of the past century aren’t real political dialogue— they are rash exaggerations meant to rile up people who aren’t knowledgeable or politically savvy enough to see through such unfounded claims. The words of the Tea Party don’t hold others in high enough esteem so as to respect opposing opinions and engage in true conversation. The idea that we must begin another “revolution whether violent or figurative, to save our country from the liberal, anti-capitalist, secular, pro-gay rights, socialist menace that is upon us, serves to do nothing more than further divide our country and demonize those with conflicting opinions.
While I strive to be the opposite of this mindset, instead engaging in civil discussion and respecting the views of others, the ways in which many members of the Tea Party have put forth their views have garnered so little of my respect that upon making the discovery that the Coffee Party was on the scene, my initial reaction was a long, frustrated groan. That someone would legitimize the rantings of the Tea Party by founding another movement in response seemed absurd. However, upon a careful perusal of the messages propagated by the Coffee Party, I realized that— notwithstanding the contradiction of starting a movement trying to bring people together by being diametrically opposed in name to another— they truly do have something quite valuable and refreshingly civil to say, and aren’t so much opposed in ideology as in method.
What first caught my eye was the Civility Pledge” on the right-hand side of the group’s Web site. Calling on those who visited the page to sign it and abide by its words it read simply: “As a member or supporter of the Coffee Party I pledge to conduct myself in a way that is civil honest and respectful toward people with whom I disagree. I value people from different cultures I value people with different ideas and I value and cherish the democratic process.”
Reading on it got better. The goal of the Coffee Party is to “reinvigorate the public sphere drawing from diverse backgrounds and diverse perspectives.” Its members do not adhere to any specific political ideology nor do they require their members to do so. The movement encourages “deliberation guided by reason amongst the many viewpoints held by our members.” It sees “diversity as a strength not a weakness because [it] believe[s] that faithful deliberation from multiple vantage points is the best way to achieve the common good.” Not screaming damnations likening those with other viewpoints to Mao or the devil or refusing dialogue with those on the other end of the political spectrum— just good old fashioned dialogue over a cup o’ Joe.
While the Coffee Party may not offer clear-cut solutions in terms of policy or candidates I believe that just might be where its advantage lies. What it does offer is something even more valuable: a more civil way of approaching political discourse. In answer to the Tea Party’s tactics of name-calling and threats of ostracism the Coffee Party is percolating openness and dialogue. And eventually maybe some Tea Partiers will even set down their figurative guns see the benefit of listening to others and being listened to in such a welcoming environment and join in on the conversation. Dirty chai anyone?
